gdp's Comments

Righteous Orbs : What’s my job?

Mon, 19 Apr 2010 20:06:23 +0000

May I please have his name and server so I can roll an alt and harass him about how much his dps sucks and how much of a scrub he is? =)

Righteous Orbs : I Gerald (Chapter II)

Fri, 16 Apr 2010 01:11:44 +0000

/applaud "Me zerg!" Ah murlocs, the orcs of the ocean world.

Righteous Orbs : a post in stories

Thu, 15 Apr 2010 00:40:11 +0000

Well you're wrong and racist in that situation because that statement is untrue. Black people as a race have no less ability to be clever. However if you were to point out that black people generally had less education across the board because they are often limited to substandard school systems as a result of their income bracket due to circumstances directly related to the enslavement of their race on this (NA) continent, you'd just be being honest. On the whole blacks (10% of the population) score lower intellectually than whites (80%) on tests because whites have a far larger median score group which is more apparent in localized testing. On that point let me say something. If someone just takes that information out context (blacks score lower) and assume it's a race thing, and not an environment thing, then they are offensive without intending to be so. Now in that situation, if you show the offended black person that the person in question is an idiot and has no working understand of why blacks score lower on said tests, I think their offended-ness will fade as they realize the person didn't mean to hurt them... they were just an idiot. Once a lack of intent is shown, the person should no longer be offended. (They are still free to hate the person for being stupid and society for making them that way.) On your final point, motive does not mean 'intending to break the law". Motive means "intending to do something". If I accidentally knock someone's item into my bookbag, I am not a thief. If I decide to take their item because I want it, I am. If I pick the wrong car in the parking lot and try to open it with my keys I am not trying to break into that car, I'm just confused. If I pry the door open, I'm trying to commit grand theft auto. (or at least breaking and entering.) Hope that clears that up. It also occurs to me, (because Sprink pointed it out) that you're from across the pond and I'm a fat lazy American that our way of using the language might cause a some misunderstand as our colloquialisms and speech patterns are slightly off. :)

Righteous Orbs : a post in stories

Thu, 15 Apr 2010 00:24:40 +0000

Well the line "...whether the offense was meant ..." is what triggered me. As for my example: No, I did not tell him to grow up or get over it at the time, because yes, I acknowledge that he in fact had a reason to be upset. I even to this day allow people to be hurt by things I don't intend. But these days if someone does what he did I'd probably tell them they were a douche bag, their sibling hates them for being such a whiny asshole, and that they are a waste of a consciousness. =/ I honestly cannot accept willful ignorance or willful oversensitivity. It's guys like him who make me hate most offended people. I'm not saying it's wrong to be offended, I'm saying it's wrong to go on the warpath when there was honestly no slight. That all being said, I have reread your post in it's entirety again and I think I somehow misinterpreted your intention, so I must apologize for the long winded irrelevant post and this follow up to it. =P I know I have already dirtied the SAN boards with my pedantic arguments about profanity, and it was never my intention do do the same in your front yard :)

Righteous Orbs : a post in stories

Wed, 14 Apr 2010 20:16:28 +0000

I should say this though: intent is not necessary for someone to be offended. However, being offended when someone meant no offensive and then trying to tell them they are in the wrong or are a bad person is inexcusable. You cannot have a crime without motive. (And don't get me started on involuntary manslaughter. There is a difference between criminal negligence and criminal ignorance.)

Righteous Orbs : a post in stories

Wed, 14 Apr 2010 20:12:11 +0000

There is one problem I found when reading this Tam. "Ultimately what offends an individual is entirely subjective. The point is not whether the offense was meant or justified..." That is just wrong. The point is whether or not offense was INTENDED. You're example of punching someone and whether or not you broke their nose shows intent either way. Now if I wave my hand and someone walks into it and I break their nose I technically did nothing wrong. (Granted I would feel bad because I'm a decent person) The onus should always been on the offended if no intent was meant. People can and will be butthurt by just about anything these days, and personally I'm sick of the social tip toe-ing that seems to be mandatory. Another thought that comes to mind is this: I told a joke one day about a a guy dying in a car crash. Turns out one of my coworkers had a sibling who died in a car crash some ten years prior. He didn't say anything at the time, but he went around telling everyone I was an insensitive prick. Now I didn't know about this fact, but in retrospect it doesn't matter. See, the guy already didn't like me for some reason. It was probably because I'm a loud mouthed, smart arsed, know-it-all. But he latched onto the fact that I (unknowingly) told a joke that was offensive in his presence. Frankly, I think death can be, and is often, funny. But the facts are, I didn't know about the sibling, it was ten years prior, and it was a joke. Unfortunately it was a joke that had a negative effect on his mood. Even so, I am not in the wrong. Ultimately, life sucks for many if not all people sometimes. And there will always be reminders of said suckiness. Learn and move on I say. And if someone wants to throw verbal fisticuffs intentionally... then fine, cut em down. But I don't want to hear some bystander cry every time he decides to jump in front of a punch because once, a long time ago someone blasted him in the kisser. Did any of that make sense? I hate trying to be consistent with metaphors. =P

Righteous Orbs : I don't believe it ... QQ! QQ!! QQ!!!

Tue, 13 Apr 2010 19:24:59 +0000

That will be annoying. I had not considered that issue at all.

Righteous Orbs : I don't believe it ... QQ! QQ!! QQ!!!

Tue, 13 Apr 2010 03:01:05 +0000

I suppose I come off a bit harsh when it comes to pugs, but I cannot find it in myself to invest anything in pugs at all. I mean sure occasionally I'll get the good group that is nice and we have fun... but usually its the 'hunter md's the tank and starts every pull even though the healer is drinking" sort of group. In which case, I'd make sure to stand by the tank and lifegrip the hunter into melee every cd. =P Also, I think it's time again to champion the cause of " if you think it's the healer's fault you died Mr. Dps, then you are an a asshat." That may very well be my next blog post.

Righteous Orbs : I don't believe it ... QQ! QQ!! QQ!!!

Fri, 9 Apr 2010 19:58:01 +0000

As a player of almost entirely plate melee classes... the people in sissy robes do generally know better. All I can see is boss butt.

Righteous Orbs : I don't believe it ... QQ! QQ!! QQ!!!

Fri, 9 Apr 2010 19:56:21 +0000

Honestly though, I don't take the game too seriously. If I was fighting I dunno, Koralon and wasn't in the fire but Tam lifegripped Derull just so that my dps would suffer.... I'd laugh. I think that it'll be a neat tool for those times when say, so and so lags up and isn't moving, or maybe to save a friend from the mc'd lolstorming warrior. I do understand that there will be some asshats who will blame the priest because they died to the fire, but there will always be those asshats. Don't let douchebags ruin a potentially fun and occassionally awesome ability. :) As for the trust thing, I don't think this ability should even come into play in a guild run. I mean if a use pops up, cool, but a group of people who choose to play together shouldn't need lifegrip anyways. And I was gonna say something about how rude it would be to lifegrip in pugs because it would be a sort of invasion of space... but who cares? They're pugs.

Righteous Orbs : I don't believe it ... QQ! QQ!! QQ!!!

Fri, 9 Apr 2010 03:24:31 +0000

I for one, am looking forward to being priest-gripper across the room without warning. I agree that this seems fun. Now if only they would give warriors a knockback shout.

Righteous Orbs : Tamadin

Thu, 25 Mar 2010 20:41:46 +0000

I often forget BoSanc gives stats. =P As for casters... oh yeah casters. Some old dungeons aren't just dps burn. :)

Righteous Orbs : Tamadin

Thu, 25 Mar 2010 18:55:03 +0000

I almost never run DPlea and never oom. And I'd never want BoW over BoK. Ever. =P With holy shield and redoubt, you should be at 40-80% block chance every 5-8 seconds, so you should be pulling in tons of mana. Part of the problem is pallies always start with consecrate. I don't use cons much, too many other threat tools in a 50 or higher level pally. However, if you don't have holy shield, the trick is to actually just pull more mobs if your mana gets low. Never tank less than 4 things at a time. :)

Righteous Orbs : Tamadin

Thu, 25 Mar 2010 16:32:31 +0000

As Deleteman said, once you get Blessing of Sanctuary, your mana problems are gone for good. (Especially with Holy Shield to guarantee a crapton of blocking.) Just give it some time, Pally tanks don't have much as far as tanking goes early on, but they grow into a pile of survivability and utility. :) Also, Harry Mudd reference FTW.

Righteous Orbs : Don't go wasting your emotion

Wed, 24 Mar 2010 17:08:33 +0000

That's okay, I've had to go back and edit both of my previous comments. I can't type for @#$%. Hmm, I was going to say the Scarlet Crusade obviously wasn't made of geniuses... though their lack of progress and your most recent comment have made me reconsider. Maybe the Crusade is smarter than I thought. Also, I just saw that I could disable that stupid auto advertisement thing in comments. Hooray!

Righteous Orbs : Don't go wasting your emotion

Wed, 24 Mar 2010 17:00:14 +0000

Context is huge aspect of social interaction on the interwebs, mostly because there is no emotional or physical context to go with the words. This is made doubly problematic when you consider that most gamers are sarcastic little twits (self included). As a result of that, what can seem friendly is actually a verbal slap in the face, or you get words like 'loser' or 'noob' used as terms of affection. Which of course leads to even more rage through miscommunication. :( /sigh My recent post The Stable – SAN Edition

Righteous Orbs : Don't go wasting your emotion

Wed, 24 Mar 2010 16:56:19 +0000

I am adding that quote to my collection of witty and humorous remarks. :) My recent post The Stable – SAN Edition

Righteous Orbs : Don't go wasting your emotion

Wed, 24 Mar 2010 16:55:26 +0000

Sorry for the huge wall of unrelated text, I have a tendency to babble. Super genius, religious zealots would probably be trying to design a machine to see how much of the witch's body mass was actually the demon possessing her, and then find a way to separate the demon and witch using some sort of high velocity strainer. My recent post The Stable – SAN Edition

Righteous Orbs : Don't go wasting your emotion

Wed, 24 Mar 2010 16:19:51 +0000

I'm going to sound like a misanthropist, but bear with me. I have a theory about human intellect. It seems to me that people get dumber, the bigger the group becomes. One guy can be pretty cool. A handful may devolve into immature conversation, but on the whole are still pretty decent. A group starts to polarize and move as one simple minded monster. A mob burns people at the stake. The equation is such: Add up the IQ of everyone involved, and divide by the number of people to find the average intellect of the group. Then subtract an amount equal to the number of people in the group from that average to find the actual operating intellect of said group. ie; (x/y) - y With x being total intellect already summed up. For example: you have 5 people, their intellect averages at 100, however their are five of them, so you subtract 5 and end up with an actual group intellect of 95; not that bad. However if you have 300 witch-burners, they are going to end up in the negatives (barring the possibility of 300+ supra genius, religious zealots). This is when mob mentality takes effect. I posted that unrelated wall of text to say this: I think that similar rules apply in the social arena. The more people you have, the more likely people are going to feel the need to defend their views... even if no one is attacking them. You get a large enough group, you lose any sort of usefulness of said group, because they start to form 'political' cliques. (read political as meaning 'of a like mindset'.) And this is stressful, as you've said, regardless of whether or not it's IRL or on the interwebs. It's a good thing there aren't 40 man raids anymore. :) My recent post The Stable – SAN Edition

Righteous Orbs : everybody's talkin'

Tue, 23 Mar 2010 15:26:25 +0000

I think self righteousness just comes with being a priest. Trainable at level 1. :) My recent post BAST: Starting Over